Topics

moderated Groups.io Message Editor #suggestion


 

Exactly, break in the social contract. Good term.


On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 10:31 AM Toby Kraft <toby@...> wrote:
I agree with J (again)
"Reply to Group" means exactly that.  Anything else would seem to be a break in the social contract between groups.io and groups it hosts.
Toby


--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


Toby Kraft
 

I agree with J (again)
"Reply to Group" means exactly that.  Anything else would seem to be a break in the social contract between groups.io and groups it hosts.
Toby


 

I also see that you are proposing the list be "editable." I think this is a dealbreaker. It would essentially allow users to pick and choose whom they want to send group messages to, and this is really a whole new feature that does not seem in keeping with the product.
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

Are you really proposing to display all 3,000+ or 20,000+ email addresses in those kinds of large groups??? I guess there would be ways of doing it without hogging the screen. But I’m not crazy about the idea, for many reasons. I do think showing the address in the case of private replies would be very helpful.

On Sep 21, 2018, at 8:20 AM, Jim Higgins <HigginsJ@sc.rr.com> wrote:

Received from Gerald Boutin at 9/21/2018 02:35 AM UTC:

I am 100% against this idea. It is already too easy for users to harvest other user's email addresses and is not necessary for communication of information.

You didn't read my original feature request very carefully.

I said, "Figleafing in conformance with group settings is OK."

That wouldn't display any more of an email address than is already displayed as the "From:" address in every message we receive.

Jim H



--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


Jim Higgins
 

Received from Gerald Boutin at 9/21/2018 02:35 AM UTC:

I am 100% against this idea. It is already too easy for users to harvest other user's email addresses and is not necessary for communication of information.

You didn't read my original feature request very carefully.

I said, "Figleafing in conformance with group settings is OK."

That wouldn't display any more of an email address than is already displayed as the "From:" address in every message we receive.

Jim H


 

Hold on, I'm re-reading the OP and I meant to limit my agreement strictly to private replies. If what's being discussed is showing all the addressees any time the reply is to the group, I think that's a dealbreaker. I'm not sure I understand what's originally being proposed.
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 09:54 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
You just see it after sending rather than before, which I find really unhelpful.
In fact, after I've sent any private reply, I immediately look for the bcc afterwards in my inbox (I *always* use the bcc for precisely this reason), anxiously hoping that I sent it to the right person. A couple of times, I haven't. It's currently a real PITA.
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 07:35 PM, Gerald Boutin wrote:
 It is already too easy for users to harvest other user's email addresses
Even if I agreed with that (which I don't), once you actually send the private reply, if you've checked "bcc me" you automatically see the email address you've sent it to anyway. You just see it after sending rather than before, which I find really unhelpful. Adding the addressee for the writer to view beforehand only adds to convenience and fewer errors, and does nothing to make "harvesting" email addresses easier.
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

I actually agree that this is currently a big problem. My group is set to reply-all, but often, topics are set to private-reply. In that case, as well as when someone purposely selects "private reply" in a reply-all (i.e., default) topic, you can't see the addressee when you reply.

This has resulted in numerous cases of private replies going to the wrong person. Some people don't realize that "private reply" means you're replying to the person whose post you are directly under, and mistakenly assume that their reply is going to the OP. Even if they do realize, some people goof and reply underneath the wrong message. 

I strongly agree that adding the addressee would be a boon by reducing (if not entirely eliminating) this kind of error.
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 09:33 PM, Jim Higgins wrote:
Not all groups are "conversation groups"... and with the ability to insert a"Reply-to:" header we have lost the ability to expect that responses are limited to group, sender or moderator (or some combination of those).
This is a case where the type of group is completely, utterly irrelevant.   If you want what you say you want then manage a private mailing list within your e-mail client.

Groups are meant, whether conversation/announcement only to go to ALL MEMBERS of a group when you reply to the group.  You, for any you, don't get to pick and choose and shouldn't be able to via the group mechanism itself.  You have lots of other very easy methods to carry on private conversations with select group members.

I just don't get why people want to circumvent the core feature of a medium that has been in existence as long as this one.  I've been around since the days of Usenet.  You never got to "pick and choose" who you were responding to when you sent a reply to a group message or created a new message going out to the group.

I, as a member of a group, have every right to expect that anything not sent as a private message is going out to the group, not the members of your choosing (for any you, not you personally).
 
--

Brian - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1803, Build 17134 
     Explanations exist; they have existed for all time; there is always a well-known solution to every human problem — neat, plausible, and wrong.

          ~ H.L. Mencken, AKA The Sage of Baltimore


Gerald Boutin <groupsio@...>
 

I am 100% against this idea. It is already too easy for users to harvest other user's email addresses and is not necessary for communication of information.

--
Gerald


Jim Higgins
 

Received from Brian Vogel at 9/20/2018 06:56 PM UTC:

On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 02:30 PM, Jim Higgins wrote:
reply will go plainly visible and editable before the reply is sent.
Why? If you are part of a typical conversation group on a service such as this one replies can, and should, always go to all current members of the group.

Groups can be set up to reply only to sender, therefore it must be Gio's opinion that your opinion above isn't shared by Gio. Nor was it shared by Yahoo Groups. Nor is it shared by group owners who have chosen to set up their groups to reply to sender rather than to the entire group.

And... unless I'm recalling incorrectly, a feature was recently added to allow a sender to insert a "Reply-to:" header that could direct a reply to a 3rd party who is neither the sender nor even a member of the group. I think we should have an opportunity to see exactly where any response is going so we can decide whether or not to send the response.


You can't do this via the e-mail interface and shouldn't be able to, either.

I shouldn't be able to see where my response is going? Seriously?!!!!!!

It's precisely because I can't do this via the web interface that I'm requesting this feature to be added. I can see who I'm replying to when I create a reply in my home email client (as I am now), why not via the Gio message editor also? It's "standard" in any email client I've ever seen that the person creating a response can see the address to which he is responding. And being able to do so is even more important when the ability exists to put any darn thing someone wants to into a "Reply-to:" header.


Private responses can go to one or more members of your choosing, but replies to a conversation group should always go to all members of the group. If you want a side group then do that by e-mail.

Not all groups are "conversation groups"... and with the ability to insert a"Reply-to:" header we have lost the ability to expect that responses are limited to group, sender or moderator (or some combination of those). If there is going to be an unexpected reply-to address added to a reply, I want to know what it is before sending that reply.

Why would you object to that?

Jim H


Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 02:30 PM, Jim Higgins wrote:
reply will go plainly visible and editable before the reply is sent.
Why?   If you are part of a typical conversation group on a service such as this one replies can, and should, always go to all current members of the group.

You can't do this via the e-mail interface and shouldn't be able to, either.

Private responses can go to one or more members of your choosing, but replies to a conversation group should always go to all members of the group.  If you want a side group then do that by e-mail.
 
--

Brian - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1803, Build 17134 
     Explanations exist; they have existed for all time; there is always a well-known solution to every human problem — neat, plausible, and wrong.

          ~ H.L. Mencken, AKA The Sage of Baltimore


Jim Higgins
 

When replying to a message via Groups.io online, I'd like to see all addresses to which that reply will go plainly visible and editable before the reply is sent. Figleafing in conformance with group settings is OK.

Currently the address(es) a reply is directed to are not visible.

Jim H